Started on Jeroba, but Thunder just felt more intuitive.

Could you elaborate? My understanding of anarchism is the goal of eliminating government. That won’t eliminate an economic system that originated organically.

And instead we get politicians worse than VEEP. Ouch.

Robotics (or more broadly mechatronics) is a super interesting field. To do the work at the mechanical/electrical interface is really hard.

The field of industrial controls skips the hard part and just buys stuff that is pre-designed to move. Then those pre-designed pieces are made to fit and work together. It’s like complicated Legos and is honestly very fun and rewarding.

If you want to do programming with a physical result, controls engineering is a great option. I would recommend shooting for the hard stuff (real programming - DSP, FPGA, etc) knowing you’ve got a safe fallback with industrial controls (PLC programming).

Has this shown to be effective at stopping bots? It seems like you’d just be a few bad actors to ruin the system

I don’t think so. The main reason Facebook is so bad is it’s engagement algorithm. It is designed to maximize user engagement to sell adds, and it does that by putting outrage inspiring posts in front of users so that they have an emotional response and stay engaged. Using a human voting system instead of an outrage algorithm to determine what content people is exactly why I enjoy this platform over the other social media platforms.

Is there still rage bait here? Of course! Is it systematically shoved down your throat? No.

I was assuming you’d make an account with the ID for the govt instance and use anonymous accounts for all other browsing. At least that’s what I would do.

I’m not familiar with web of trust. What does that mean?

I believe there is existing precedent from SCOTUS that official government Twitter accounts were not allowed to block citizens accounts due to it being a ‘public square’. So that was a govt official taking the action of silencing someone’s ability to respond to them on social media protected by 1A. If the PLATFORM had blocked that user it would have been perfectly valid, since the GOVT did not silence a citizen’s speech.

I believe having the govt run the instance would make the entire forum subject to 1A in a way current social media is not. Would love a constitutional scholar to chime in, but that’s my argument.

I also don’t get the impression there is a large bot presence here today. I do think if the platform was used as a normal communication network between constituient and representative it would probably become a target for foreign and domestic bots.

Oh yeah, location sharing will have almost no effect those risks. Totally agree.

Just disagreeing that low probability of occurrence automatically means the risk assessment should be low.

Risk assessment is probability and severity. The probability can be vanishingly low, but if the severity is astoundingly high then acting like a high risk situation could be appropriate.

Take asteroids. The last planet killer to hit us was 94million years ago. A rudimentary estimate could put the probably as 1:94mil. The severity of an asteroid impact of that magnitude is off the charts, so it is reasonable to consider it a risk and act accordingly to spend resources to search for and track asteroid trajectories.

The severity of abduction, murder, and rape is probably pretty high for most people, so considering it a risk even with a very small probability is not unreasonable.

Nice of the billionaire to vacate perfect real estate for city owned grocery stores

I agree it feels very slow, but identifying the correct action and then building consensus around that action takes time. Once consensus is built it is very stable though. That is supposed to be the biggest benefit of democracy; stability built through coalition.

Thank you for the write up. That distinction makes a lot of sense.

Ahh fantastic point. There isn’t really an incentive for the individuals to maintain/perpetuate the institution.

I understand the sentiment. I’m wondering about the efficacy of the strategies to achieve those end goals.

I don’t agree with this. Shareholders extracting value from a company is arguably more of an ‘inefficency’ than treating employees fairly. Well treated employees provide a benefit to the company while shareholders purely remove resources.

I have no data to back up my claim, just logic, so I could very well be wrong.

That you very much for writing this up. It is super interesting, and I feel bad for dismissing her. Unfortunately, I will probably continue people whom are the vague they.

I read this in Jake Peralta’s voice.